Lawyers need client approval for settling cases
0 commentsThe fact a party authorizes an attorney to enter settlement negotiations and knows the negotiations are occurring does not mean that the attorney has authority to approve a settlement, according to a ruling today by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
In Carol and David Bay v. Michael Pulliam and Cardinal Transportation, LLC, 49A05-0612-CV-704, the Court of Appeals reversed a Marion Superior Court decision that granted a motion to enforce settlement agreement in favor of Pulliam and Cardinal Transportation. At issue was whether a settlement between an attorney for the Bays and Pulliam's insurance company could be binding if the Bays did not agree to it.
Business blogs
0 commentsMSNBC has a rather lively business blog, YOUR BIZ. What I like is it has a good tone - no business professor lecturing - and it is directly targeted towards small businesses. Here are the recent posts as of today:
- Take my blog, please
- Home-based entrepreneurs get their 15 minutes
- Size 2 is better for you
- Santa's looking for a few good American elves
- E-mail made me stupid
Indiana winery law unconstitutional
0 commentsIndiana's law prohibiting out-of-state wineries from shipping to Hoosier customers without face-to-face contact is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Indianapolis has ruled.
U.S. District Judge John D. Tinder issued a 71-page decision , and a separate four-page judgment and injunction late Wednesday in Patrick L. Baude et al. v. David L. Heath and Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of Indiana , No. 1:05-cv-0735-JDT-TAB.
At issue in this case was whether state statute involving direct wine shipment violated the out-of-state wineries rights by barring them from newly created direct wine seller permits. The law went into effect in March 2006, and this federal suit came the following month.
Plaintiffs include a major Michigan winery, Chateau Grand Traverse, and five consumers. They challenged the law, part of which mandated they have at least one face-to-face transaction to allow the winery to verify the customer's age. The winery contended the rules discriminated against out-of-state wineries by preventing them from competing in the direct-sale market, and the consumers argued they were barred from obtaining many wines because of the impracticality of traveling outside the state or to complete the in-person requirement.
Defendant Heath, commissioner of the Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission, contended the laws do not discriminate and are needed to prevent the sale of alcohol to minors - the state's interest in protecting its youth outweighs any incidental burdens on interstate commerce.
Judge Tinder disagreed, noting that the requirement creates a trade barrier for wineries by requiring them to set up shop in Indiana or limit their potential market to buyers willing to travel to them.
Taking Down Words has a post at Sour Grapes: Tinder Strikes Down Indiana's Latest Wine Shipment Law and The Indiana Law Blog posted the story under Ind. Decisions - More on: Federal Judge Tinder rules for plainitiifs in Indiana wine shipping suit.
I suppose we should expect an appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals unless the Governor wants to save a bit of our tax money for a better purpose.
Spatial Law and Policy Update (August 30, 2009)
1 commentsI encourage those who are interested in potential liability issues associated with navigation devices to read the following article from the Salt Lake Tribune. It concerns a man who was killed when he came over the crest of a hill and swerved to avoid cars that were sitting in traffic at a construction sight. According to the article, the family alleged that the Department of Transportation and a contractor failed to put up signs that there would be traffic delays due to the construction. The family's attorney stated that the man "knew about the construction", but didn't know where traffic would be backing up. The widow and her children who were awarded $4.4 million dollars by a jury.
The need for a rational and coherent legal and policy framework surrounding spatial data is most evident at the intersection of imagery and privacy. For example, once again Google is having to defend its policies with respect to Street View to a privacy regulator. This time, it is in Switzerland,
In a related matter, the BBC reported this week that an internal police report suggested that "only one crime was solved by each 1,000 CCTV cameras in London last year". The article points out that CCTV - and similar types of systems which are increasingly being used around the world - can be helpful in a number of other ways, not the least of which is as a deterrent. However, given the cost associated with the technology and its potential threat to privacy, it is incumbent upon authorities to maximize the technology's value for law enforcement.
Franchising news: Noble Roman's
0 commentsThe Indianapolis Business Journal has an article on Nobles Romans strategy used in its return. For those interested in franchising and/or opening their restaurant, I think it has some very good points. The article is Noble Roman’s rebuilds empire.
The Mobleys got back on their feet by shuttering nearly all the full-service restaurants and instead focusing on franchising outlets in non-traditional locales like convenience stores, airports and military bases.
It then moved into stand-alone restaurants branded as both Noble Roman’s and Tuscano’s Italian Style Subs. The pizza and sub shops operate in the same location, much as some Pizza Hut and Taco Bell outlets do.
Including all its formats, the company now has more than 1,200 outlets in 45 states and abroad. It operates just three of its own restaurants, all in the Indianapolis area.
So what is your business' software policy?
0 comments"Hew Griffiths, a 44-year-old NSW man is serving a 15-month sentence in a US jail for software piracy. Griffiths had never set foot in the US before he was indicted there. Indeed he had never owned a passport. Yet he was convicted under US law for copyright breaches he committed while in Australia. And the Australian Government agreed to extradite Griffiths to the US to be sentenced and jailed there. Surely Griffiths must have been some sort of software piracy godfather to warrant an international extradition and High Court challenge? Here's a sobering thought: rather than making any money out of his piracy activities, Griffiths cracked security codes on proprietary software and made that software available free on the internet. He wasn't raking in bundles of cash for his activities but he allowed thousands of people to get free software that otherwise would have been protected."
Location and Privacy - What is the New "Reasonable"
0 commentsLocation has arrived – and it is raising all sorts of privacy concerns. In the past few months alone:
1. Facebook launches “Places” and within hours the media and privacy begin criticizing the service as failing to adequately, address privacy concerns.
2. Congressman Bobby Rush introduces legislation that would for the first time regulate on a broad scale the collection, use and distribution of location information on individuals in the U.S..
3. Federal appeals court in District of Columbia finds that the use of a tracking device to monitor a suspect for a month without obtaining a warrant was an an unreasonable search and seizure. This decision directly conflicts other court decisions, with some suggesting that Supreme Court may have to resolve issue.
4. Media reports that citizens on Long Island are complaining that government agencies are acting like Big Brother by using Google Earth to find unpermitted swimming pools in backyard.
5. Government officials in Germany are considering increasing regulations on Google collecting Street View imagery as a result of privacy concerns.
6. Article details how much sensitive information can be obtained from geotagged photos posted on-line.
7. Decision expected from federal court on whether law enforcement needs to obtain a warrant before obtaining location information from mobile phone provider.
8. In Maine, the attorney general struggles whether to allow GPS devices to be attached to citizens' cars by lenders wishing to track vehicle usage for resale of auto loans.
Each of these are examples of how society is grappling with how to deal with the impact of different technologies on the concept of privacy from a location standpoint. As these technologies becomes more ubiquitous, the complexity of the issues are only going to increase. (For example, companies will use software that will predict where you are going to be in the future based upon where you have been in the past.)
I do not know how all this will play out. (Althought I have some ideas!) However, my sense is that this is much bigger - and the conversation should be much broader - than debating such things as whether location privacy settings on Facebook should be opt-in or opt out. What is needed is an informed dialogue and debate on how location technology is changing our lives and which are privacy concerns are legitimate and which are normal reactions to being uncomfortable with the introduction of new technology.
Location technology has the potential to save lives, provide valuable commercial and governmental services and make our planet a better and more sustainable place to live. However, it will never reach its full potential until consistent and transparent laws and policies surrounding location privacy are developed!
